Southern Turnout Timbers

[Yorkshire Dave]

Thanks for the table . Just counted the sleepers for my SR 60' track sections - only 18! . I'll remember this for my next SR layout.

...then my layout was only built as an 8' test track to try out point building, track laying and scenery techniques in O scale. Loosely based on an imaginary branch line from Wittersham Road to Rye.

 

[Pencarrow]

Thanks for the table . Just counted the sleepers for my SR 60' track sections - only 18! . I'll remember this for my next SR layout.

...then my layout was only built as an 8' test track to try out point building, track laying and scenery techniques in O scale. Loosely based on an imaginary branch line from Wittersham Road to Rye.

Here's a PDF with the spacing data that I've put into Templot for the 4 types of panel.

And a comparison...

 

[Andrew]

The different spacings are deliberate Dave.

There will be examples of the following on the layout:

View attachment 61077

Mostly the SR 60' panels with a few SR 45' panels in the yard. I'm going to sneak in a few remnants of the LSWR spacings at the end of two sidings. Nobody will notice but I will know they are there!

Hi Chris/Dave,

As I am a devotee of the LSWR, I have been following your thread with interest.

I have some additional information to offer which has been taken from official drawings of the period, which could help you with your track building. Firstly, a small correction to your sleeper spacing table, if I may. Track panels laid in 1894 were 30ft in length with 11 sleepers, not 14. You correctly observe that sleepers each side of the rail joint are closer together which is intended to give additional support to a potential weak point in the track where it is only held together by the fishplate. In both 30ft and 45ft panels, these sleepers are spaced at 1ft 1in centres (ie 6 1/2in each side of the joint). The next sleepers each side of these are spaced at 2ft 5in centres for the 30ft panel and 2ft 4 1/4in centres for the 45ft panel, with subsequent sleepers at 2ft 10 1/2in for the 30ft panel and 2ft 6 1/2 in centres for the 45ft panel. These last spacings continue till you get to the third sleeper from the end and you then re-apply the reduced spacings above, in reverse order. Lots of different dimensions to apply I know, but you will find that it all works out perfectly and better still, is very distinctive, looks the part and is prototypically correct. As a final thought, trackwork in yards tended to reflect early practice well into the 20th century, so it would be perfectly feasible to have very short track lengths with rail and sleepers of dubious quality all over the place (even 24ft in some 'out of the way' locations)! Unfortunately, most model trackwork in yards is far too neat and tidy.

I hope this info will be of assistance to you.

Regards,

Andrew

 

[Pencarrow]

Many thanks Andrew, I'll have a look at this tonight and adjust my table.

 

[Pencarrow]

Must go back to see what my original source for the info was.

 

[Andrew]

Must go back to see what my original source for the info was.

Hi Chris,

I have just re-read what I wrote this morning and spotted a stupid error on my part! Humble apologies.

The sleepers each side of the rail joint should be spaced at 2ft 2in centres and not 1ft 1in as stated. I accidentally misread the original drawing I have which is a bit faint in the vital area and having double checked with another source I can confirm that 1ft 1in relates to the distance from the rail joint itself to the centre of the first sleeper ( hence 2ft 2in between sleeper centres each side of the fishplate). Should have been obvious really but I will claim a 'senior moment' there! Happily, all other dimensions are correct. If I can get my camera up and running and with the help of my 'lovely assistant' here, I might be able to upload a photo of an unballasted 30 ft length of track I laid a little while ago to give you an idea of how it looks 'in the raw', if you are interested.

Once again, my apologies,

Andrew

 

[Pencarrow]

Andrew,

Just worked through your posts and put them into a revision of my spreadsheet. As you say the figures all add up nicely:



Will now plonk the figures into Templot to see what it looks like...

Many thanks.

 

[Pencarrow]

Looks nice, some old LSWR track panels in the clay siding...

 

[Pencarrow]

The rear goods shed siding will have panels from all four types that I have sleeper dimensions for - from right to left: SR 1926 60' and 45', LSWR 1919 45' and LSWR 1894 30'.

 

[Pencarrow]

Two panels of each for comparison:

 

[Andrew]

The rear goods shed siding will have panels from all four types that I have sleeper dimensions for - from right to left: SR 1926 60' and 45', LSWR 1919 45' and LSWR 1894 30'.

View attachment 61134

Hi Chris,

Just had a look at your design and it all fits nicely. One other point of detail, the 30ft panels should be sitting on 9ft long sleepers, albeit in fairly manky condition and probably well buried but it would add another layer of authenticity.

Regards,

Andrew

 

[Pencarrow]

Hi Chris,

Just had a look at your design and it all fits nicely. One other point of detail, the 30ft panels should be sitting on 9ft long sleepers, albeit in fairly manky condition and probably well buried but it would add another layer of authenticity.

Regards,

Andrew

Yes, I altered the sleepers to 9' on the 30' panels last night. Agree with manky - both condition and alignment of the ends.

What sleeper length for the LSWR 45' (1919) panels?

 

[Andrew]

Yes, I altered the sleepers to 9' on the 30' panels last night. Agree with manky - both condition and alignment of the ends.

What sleeper length for the LSWR 45' (1919) panels?

Hi Chris,

My notes tell me that 45' rail was first used by the LSWR in 1903, (initially for new running lines between Woking and Basingstoke), but as it remained the standard length until 1922 it would have been used progressively all over the system. Similarily, in answer to your question, 9' x 10" x 5" creosoted fir sleepers were also the standard for this period.

Happy to be of assistance.

Regards,

Andrew

 

[Pencarrow]

Next question Andrew... What chairs would the LSWR 30' and 45' panels use? 3 bolt or something else?? Interesting subject!

 

[Andrew]

Next question Andrew... What chairs would the LSWR 30' and 45' panels use? 3 bolt or something else?? Interesting subject!

Hi Chris,

Interesting subject indeed.

It is fair to say that over the years I have become a bit of a 'trackwork junkie' and, as I am sure you will understand, there 'aint no cure' ( not that I am looking for one!) But seriously, the most common chair used by the LSWR in the period you are interested in was a three bolt pattern with two bolts on the outside of the rail and one on the inside. Unfortunately, there are no 7mm chairs of this pattern available at present. Some time ago, I used Slaters early Midland pattern, which are actually four bolt, but had the distinctive lightweight appearance I was looking for on my branch line terminus, circa 1895. Following the preferred method of track construction in those days, these chairs were individually cut in half and glued on each side of the brass rivet head which the rail had been soldered to. Looked good but very tedious to do! I also followed the early practice of ballasting over the sleepers up to rail level which had the effect of disguising the incorrect bolt pattern inside the rail. Currently, C and L do a three bolt chair but unfortunately, the bolts are the wrong way round and for my money, the best compromise would be to use their four bolt pattern 7CH104A which at least has a casting shape which is very similar to the LSWR pattern. It is, in effect, the modern version of the one I used. Incidentally, I did look into having some LSWR chairs made to the correct pattern with Len Newman of Exactoscale fame, but the price was prohibitive. However, these days with 3D printing and so on it may be worth another visit.

Regards,

Andrew

 

[richard_t]

Not that it's much help, but the South West Circle used to do 4mm LSWR chairs, commissioned I guess direct from Exactoscale at the time (ref PW055). I have a packet of them knocking about in my box of 4mm stuff somewhere. I see the Circle don't do anymore in any case.

 

[Pencarrow]

Thanks both. Very noticeable that the available range of track components shrinks considerably when you work in 7mm. C&L have lots of special chairs available in 4mm that aren't in their 7mm range. I bet they will be added as soon as I finish the track!

 

[Andrew]

Not that it's much help, but the South West Circle used to do 4mm LSWR chairs, commissioned I guess direct from Exactoscale at the time (ref PW055). I have a packet of them knocking about in my box of 4mm stuff somewhere. I see the Circle don't do anymore in any case.

Hi Richard/Chris,

You are spot on. Also as a member of The South Western Circle, it was the availability of correct 4mm chairs that prompted me to look into a 7mm version. The potential market was then and still is, albeit to a slightly lesser extent, much larger in 4mm than 7mm and the development costs could not effectively be recovered through general sales. Added to that was the fact that the LSWR was not as popular with modellers as say the GWR or Midland so exaserbating the problem.

Hey ho!

Regards,

Andrew

 

[Peter Cross]

Could always use half a 4 bolt and half a 2 bolt.



I am using 3 bolt although I know they are not right. But then whatever is done will be wrong.

 

[Andrew]

Could always use half a 4 bolt and half a 2 bolt.



I am using 3 bolt although I know they are not right. But then whatever is done will be wrong.

Hi Peter,

Sounds an interesting idea; the more so if you could find a fellow modeller who could make use of the other halves.

Andrew